When you actually want ask me about what I write, let me know.

But I’m being argumentative, when I meant to ask a question: why do you think blaming the voter is a winning strategy?

I think opposing that kind of nonsense deserves to be opposed, don’t you?

However, many of the Democrats who won last November promising how “fiscally conservative” they are (ahem, ahem) just may be.

If you roll over and do whatever the Democrats want, you’re “collegial”

You’re telling me that with a Republican majority in the Senate and the House, the Republicans’ willingness to work with their colleagues towards a goal that more than a bare partisan majority could support was “rolling over and doing whatever the Democrats wanted?” Do you think it’s desirable or even possible for a bipartisan body to govern with an interest greater than that of the majority party?

Brian, do you believe that for Republicans to regain control of the General Assembly, Webb’s seat, the governorship, etc., they must move farther to the right? I suspect I know the answer to this question already, but it’s worth asking.

I love that. If you roll over and do whatever the Democrats want, you’re “collegial”

Every Senate Democrat voted the opposite way that the Senate Republicans did. Are there no “collegial” Democrats?

I see a gaping hole in your logic. Political outcomes do not always follow nicely drawn trend lines.

Well duh. :) Any forecast of what is to come is contingent on knowledge of what has taken place thus far and limited to the ability to project what will happen if current trends follow past trends. What you’re saying here is that sometimes bad, unexpected stuff happens and that will change stuff. Well, yeah. But if the RPV is banking on Mark Warner being caught with a live boy or a dead hooker, that’s really not much of a strategy, is it?

I have written many times that Virginians prefer their politics blended. Our citizens care less about Party labels, and base their decisions on local issues and the local personalities who cast their hats in the political ring. As a consequence, you have men like me who champion a return to a more limited, Constitutional based form of government, yet I can sometimes support positions by men I consider to be “good Democrats” like, Creigh Deeds and John Miller.

However, do not count the GOP out, so soon. To use a sports analogy, my Republican Party has a very deep bench. The Virginia GOP has so many talented emerging political leaders, the citizens are often faced with choices between three to five superb candidates in the local primary. With the exception of Novaville, the Democrats are hard pressed to find a single man to run for each House seat.

One of many areas where we both agree, is that my Republican Party seems to be courting disaster when they select candidates who lack broad appeal. I see the use of a Convention system, in lieu of a primary, to be a form of retreat. I still believe that Republican candidates have more of the qualities and champion the core beliefs shared by the vast majority of Virginians, yet when we nominate via convention, we tend to pick candidates with too narrow an appeal to succeed in the general election (unless, as in the case of the recent First District House race, the district is heavily gerrymandered in our favor).

While it is fun to watch and debate the meaning of apparent trends, here in Virginia, all it takes is for a politician to take an anti-civil libertarian stand, as George Allen did with regard to domestic spying, and millions of libertarian-leaning citizens will withdraw their support. It therefore behooves politicians, whether they have a D or R next to their names, to remember that their first priority must be enhancing the liberty of our citizens.